Red Mosquito

turned2black wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:world war z should bomb.

Is Man of Steel good in 3D?

With all the marketing behind it, I doubt WWZ will flat-out bomb. It'll be battling MOS for the No. 2 spot.

the zombies just look sooooo bad.

I'm really looking forward to World War Z - possibly more so than Man of Steel (Which still hasn't come out here)

I'll be seeing "Monsters University".
Pixar is getting good at churning out schlock. "Finding Dory"... are you fucking serious.

turned2black wrote:I'll be seeing "Monsters University".
Pixar is getting good at churning out schlock. "Finding Dory"... are you fucking serious.

They've taken a lot of luster out of the brand, for sure.

BurtReynolds wrote:

turned2black wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:world war z should bomb.

Is Man of Steel good in 3D?

With all the marketing behind it, I doubt WWZ will flat-out bomb. It'll be battling MOS for the No. 2 spot.

the zombies just look sooooo bad.

Yeah and the shooting was a disaster...im expecting a John Carter type of failure.

I'm not blaming the director totally. I'm blaming the editor and the life sucking pace jumping itch in this film. It could have been really really great.
Falls on its face owing to MTV editing.
Such a poor showing as a result.

I can't wait for The Lone Ranger so I can get the hell out of metropolis.

the fuck is MTV editing?

Sort of how you post.

Mecca wrote:the fuck is MTV editing?

It's a real thing (more info here), but I don't think it's the movie's main problem.

Only if every hyperactive editing done today can be like Paul Greengrass' Bourne movies.

Harry Lime wrote:Only if every hyperactive editing done today can be like Paul Greengrass' Bourne movies.

i hate shaky cam in all its forms. its a blight on movie history. but i would make a distinction between mtv editing and shaky cam.

BurtReynolds wrote:

Harry Lime wrote:Only if every hyperactive editing done today can be like Paul Greengrass' Bourne movies.

i hate shaky cam in all its forms. its a blight on movie history. but i would make a distinction between mtv editing and shaky cam.

Yeah but I'm talking about the editing of those shots. Shaky cam, smooth transitions.

Harry Lime wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Harry Lime wrote:Only if every hyperactive editing done today can be like Paul Greengrass' Bourne movies.

i hate shaky cam in all its forms. its a blight on movie history. but i would make a distinction between mtv editing and shaky cam.

Yeah but I'm talking about the editing of those shots. Shaky cam, smooth transitions.

yeah Greengrass seems to be the only one who can do it decently. Though I've never had a problem following the action in a Snyder movie. I think he's pretty good at fight scenes. the only thing he over uses is bullet time crap. But i dont think it was in this movie at all.

theplatypus wrote:

Mecca wrote:the fuck is MTV editing?

It's a real thing (more info here), but I don't think it's the movie's main problem.

Thanks, this is something I've never paid attention to before. Dime just seemed rather flippant about it so I didn't know if he was just being an old man yelling at the clouds.

BurtReynolds wrote:http://io9.com/the-most-important-scenes-from-man-of-steel-as-i-remem-516405346

"Plot devices: the movie" - a wise man

Just came back from watching this one....the best thing in the movie were Eddie Vedder and Kevin Costner...
The dark and gritty tone is cool, but a little too much for my taste for this character.
Please... that scientist and the military scenes..my god, what a lousy script...even that scene with Perry and that girl trapped in the building...who cares about her! i only saw her two times, show me superman fighting, show me Martha Kent or Louis...too many useless characters around.
I felt the actions scenes were poorly handled, the dialogue was mostly rubbish, the main villain killed a lot of people and yet in the final scene our hero is wondering about maybe finishing him or not...and that ending?? everyone smiling?
Louis knows the secret already? thats it??

i wasnt expecting more of this movie, so i cant say its a letdown but give more intelligent ones like Iron Man 3.

why do they always have to kill pa kent?

By MTV editing I really was referring to the non linear jumping back and forth and back again within the story. Just don't think it suited the story. A liner a to b to c would have suited this story better I think.
He probably was trying to escape that given that's how the original went but he could have done it with a lot more style. The material is there in this film and its all good stuff, but its horribly disjointed.